Leicester

Okay.

They wrote together the contract, these two, and then their wallet, which is the deployer wallet.

What's the token out there, what they do then after they, so basically they meant,

the tokens, or in this case, mine them out, they mint them out, mine them out.

They took a section of those tokens and they dumped them over to other wallets, fresh off jump.

Many tokens do the same thing.

They'll do the initial load, whether it's minting or, or, uh, mining doesn't matter.

And then they'll take segments of it and they'll distribute to other wallets in of itself.

It's not a problem if you disclose what we're doing with it and their transparency.

So,

You could have one that's a treasury wallet.

You could have one that's a vesting wallet.

You could have one that's for marketing and so on.

So many of the projects got smart about just communicating these intents, but you couldn't necessarily prove the intent because there was no accounting of the dollars, right?

So if you're doing a sell, we're selling $50,000 from this wallet and it went to this invoice that went to this company.

Why don't they do that?

Because if they did that and they communicated that intent down to the nth,

It means that there's questions about the amount of money they spent.

I had the same conversation with Seifu in the community because people were asking questions about the marketing and the blockchain costs.

And it seemed excessive.